AJIT SINGH SAINI Vs. THE REGISTRAR, CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of CWP No. 16718 of 1991 (Ajit Singh Saini Vs. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Punjab and others) and CWP No. 6854 of 1992 (Nachhattar Singh Brar and others Vs. Punjab State Co-operative Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd. and another) , as common questions of law and facts are involved in both these writ petitions.

(2.) For brevity, the facts are taken from CWP No. 16718 of 1991. The petitioners by way of these writ petitions challenged the orders vide which their representation for fixing seniority was declined by passing a non- speaking order. The claim of the petitioners in the present writ petitions is that they are entitled to fixation of their seniority from the date of joining in the parent society and not when their services were taken over by the Punjab State Co-operative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited (for short Markfed). It is the case of the petitioners that common cadre were constituted under section 84-A of the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 and on formation thereof the staff appointed with the various Marketing Societies in the State was taken over by the Markfed. The Markfed had notified "Punjab State Supply and Marketing Co-operative Services (Common Cadre) Rules, 1967 and under Rule 1.3 thereof, these rules were made effective to all the employees working in the Co-operative Marketing/Processing Societies and the District. Wholesale Supply & Marketing Co-operative Marketing Society, Lalru on 28.6.1967 and in the other case petitioner had joined on 26.9.1968. As per the provisions of the Common Cadre Rules, employees of the Marketing Societies were to be screened and if found suitable on selection by the Screening Committee/Administrative Committee, they were to be absorbed with the Markfed as Manager C-Grade. It is not in dispute that the petitioners were, in fact, screened and appointed in Markfed. The case of the petitioners set up in the writ petitions is that under the Common Cadre Rule 2.7, seniority in a particular cadre of the post of the employees who were on regular service of Markfed or the Society was to be determined according to the date of joining that category of posts and thus, the claim set up in the petitions by the petitioners is that their seniority was to be fixed from the date they joined in the parent society as they were holding equivalent posts in the Society.

(3.) Written statement has been filed by the respondents, wherein facts are not disputed. However, the only stand taken is that the petitioners were to be absorbed in pursuance of the resolution dated 7/10.12.1979 and according to the said resolution, the employees were to be given seniority from the date of their absorption in the Markfed.